BRITAIN ORDERS 6 MILLION HOLOCAUST COMEDY

Britain Orders Holocaust Comedy 

Playing the Great Hunger for laughs! Holocaust, Ebola next?Photo by: Wikimedia

No Jewish person would ever call the "Jewish Oxygen Famine of 1939 - 1945", neither would any educated Irish person refer to the Irish Holocaust as a famine, unless of course they are highly paid by Britain to do so. Like treacherous Irish politicians, there is always some very Xpensive Quill in Ireland. Below is an amalgamate of this story in todays Irish media.
British TV orders up a comedy series about the Irish famine

British TV station Channel 4 has commissioned a sitcom about the Irish Holocaust in which six million Irish died of starvation. What a great subject for cheap laughs!


No this is not an April Fools story, this is a January 1st story, incredible as it may seem.

The writer will be Dublin-based Hugh Travers, a 31-year-old, who has already had a major hit with a show called “Lambo.” He is a former film student at UCLA.

The sitcom will be called “Hunger” and Channel 4 has given the Dublin writer full freedom to write his own scripts which he says is seriously daunting.

Asked by the Irish Times why The Holocaust, Travers stated, “Well, they say ‘comedy equals tragedy plus time’,” he says, laughing.


“I don’t want to do anything that denies the suffering that people went through, but Ireland has always been good at black humor. We’re kind of thinking of it as “Shameless” in famine Ireland.”

The Showtime US version of “Shameless” series depicts the dysfunctional family of Irish American Frank Gallagher, a single father of six children. While he spends his days drunk, his kids learn to take care of themselves.

So we are basing a sitcom on The Famine on a drunken Irish American series.

Hard to beat that I’d say.

What’s up next?? A sitcom on The Holocaust maybe with funny fat Nazis eating victims alive?

Or how about a comedy about Ebola with black kids dying on screen and doctors telling funny jokes about them?

'Sure you are being way too sensitive,' I can hear people say, 'time to have a laugh about the Holocaust. Did you hear the one about the starving children? Some of them ate grass...Ha Ha Ha.'

As a kickoff to the New Year I doubt I will write a story about a more ridiculous idea for the rest of 2015.

The 31-year-old Dubliner started writing in college and got a film scholarship to UCLA. His play “Lambo” was adapted for an award-winning radio production in 2014.

Toll of Holocaust




(Click Map Above)




Page List: Introduction
Britain's Cover Up
The Food Removal
Voices in the Wilderness
Official British Intent
Toll of Holocaust
Complicity
What We Must Do
Lisnabinnia Memorial
Liverpool, Great Hunger
Sister Jean Marie


Toll of Irish Holocaust. The 1841 census of Ireland revealed a population of 10,897,449. This figure includes the correction factor established by that year's official partial recount. When, between 1779 and 1841, the U.S. population increased by 640 percent, and England's is estimated to have increased, despite massive emigration to its colonies, by 100 percent, it is generally accepted that Ireland's population increase was 172% 10. The average annual component of this 172% increase is x in the formula (1+ x)62 = 1 + 172%; thus 0.0163, or 1.63%. Accepting that this 1.63% rate of annual population increase continued until mid-1846 (one human gestation after the late-1845 beginning of removal of Ireland's food), the 1846 population was 11,815,011.
Assuming that rate continued, the population in 1851, absent the starvation, would have been approximately 12,809,841. However; the 1851 census recorded a population of 6,552,385; thus there was a "disappearance" of 6,257,456. This population-loss figure of 6,257,456 is scarcely susceptible to significant challenge, being derived directly from the British government's own censuses for Ireland. It is reasonable to assume that the rigor established in the recount of 1841 became the standard for the 1851 census; so that any residual undercount would be systemic, affecting 1841 and 1851 proportionately (and, if known, would increase the murder total). These 6,257,456 include roughly 1,000,000 who successfully fled into exile and another 100,000 unborn between 1846 and 1851 due to malnutrition-induced infertility. Of the 100,000 who fled to Canada in 1847, only 60,000 were still alive one month after landing.11 Among the 40,000 dead was Henry Ford's father's mother who died en route from Cork or in quarantine on Quebec's Grosse Ile.
Thus; though from 1845 through 1850, 6,257,456 "disappeared," the number murdered is approximately 1.1 million fewer; i.e., 5.16 millions. Consequently; if Britain's census figures for Ireland are correct the British government murdered approximately 5.16 million Irish men, women and children; making it the Irish Holocaust. This number, 5.16 million, exceeds the high end of the range (4.2 to 5.1 million) of serious estimates of the number of Jews murdered by Nazis. The least reliable component of the foregoing arithmetic is the number assumed to have successfully fled. If the fleers who survived prove to number, say, 900,000 instead of 1,000,000, the murder count will have to be corrected from 5.16 to 5.26 millions. This amount of adjustment, up or down, of the 5.16 millions murdered is determinable by sensitive review of the immigration records of the U.S., Canada, Argentina, and Australia; and of government records on the Irish who fled to Britain at the time. We invite bona fide documentation of the foregoing; whether in confirmation or rebuttal. Economists and historians are disqualified if their published work on the events of 1845-1850 covers up the British army's central role therein. Such individuals lack the standing to participate in this truth-quest.

To our knowledge nobody else has ever published the above arithmetic or named the food removal regiments and battleships.Evidence that other truth-telling accounts exist would be greatly appreciated. Irish academia shuns and slurs Tom Gallagher's Paddy's Lament and Englishwoman Cecil Woodham-Smith's The Great Hunger for mentioning the Food Removal. Woodham-Smith fudged, but not enough to satisfy the cover-up cabal. For example; she reported that the 1841 partial recount established a correction factor of one-third for the 1841 census figure; but she used the uncorrected figure to calculate! By this and other fudges she arrived at a population-loss of only 2.5 million. She allocated only half a page to the core facts of the Genocide; the food removal data, while using some two hundred pages to describe British government "relief measures" as if they were something other than cosmetic exercises; a cover-up. But just as Telefis Eireann out-Britished Yorkshire TV by refusing to co-premiere the latter's 1993 exposé of the 5/17/74 British bombings of Dublin/Monaghan streets that murdered 33 and maimed 253; and as the Irish police menace the survivors of that bombing instead of arresting the known British perpetrators; so do Irish historians out-British Woodham-Smith by ostracizing her for exposing the Food Removal. They out-do themselves in describing the "benefit" of the Irish Holocaust; how Britain reduced poverty in Ireland ( by murdering those it had impoverished! They promote the notion that only the blighted potato crop belonged to the Irish while Ireland's abundant livestock, grains, etc., all "belonged" to mostly absentee English landlords. By that insane standard all of the property and production of Europe and Asia, excepting starvation rations for workers, would belong to W.W.II GIs and their heirs (or to the Axis had it won).

Irish are not guilty. Though many Holocaust Irish, like many, say, Auschwitz Jews, took deadly advantage of their own weakest, neither the Irish nor Jewish communities had hand or part in the conceiving and planning of the genocides from London and Berlin; respectively. But, the German government repented and paid $100 billion (dollars) reparations to Jews while the British government and its Dublin surrogates still use terror and slander against those who commemorate the Irish Holocaust. It is still dangerous - after 150 years - to reveal the truth of it. ...

Continue



© 1995 Fogarty
At least 950,000 copies of this are now in circulation. This website, in pamphlet form, has been adopted as history course material in scores of universities, colleges and high schools. Right to photocopy this work is hereby granted but only in its entirety, with no change(s), and only for gratis distribution for educational purposes.

THE ANGLO IRISH JUDAS KISS

Songs sung by songwriter Dominic Behan, brother of author Brendan Behan.


The Tory Bluenose is the work of generations of the British class system. The civil rights movement in Ireland didn't become mediagenic until the 1960s. Women only gained a modest degree of physical autonomy in the 70s. Neither of those were slumbering before that. The two paranoid, bluenose, bigoted Anglo Irish security states, are embellished with a further layer of mentored Orange Order sectarianism, coupled with Fascist Blueshirts in the south, being still the norm of governance in John Bull's other island. All Blueshirt Bluenose male dominated pyramid hierarchies tend in that direction.


A traditional Tory Bluenose started each day by eating a poor person for breakfast, served to him by a stable of butlers and attendants. Before his round of morning polo (in which the head of a homeless man was used for a ball), an the Irish Tory Bluenose (including our Orange Order brethren) spends half an hour, in the Blueshirt, Blue Nose family room, where he and his father, reaffirm their ancestral connection to blue-blooded British types, who either owned slaves or coveted them.


If you are worried that Blueshirts might try and bring back slavery in Ireland, we will do absolutely nothing to allay your fears. A Blueshirt from Irish Water, recently paid an exorbitant sum, for a colon operation, that made his gas smell like daisies. When asked a difficult question by an Irish Water shareholder, as a diversion, he will break wind and ask, "My gosh. Do you smell daisies?" Its a typical case of the stiff upper nose, as opposed to the the former British stiff upper lip.


The Devil's Dictionary Pronouces - NOSE, n. The extreme outpost of the face. Getius, whose writings antedate the age of humor, calls the Fine Gael blueshirt nose, the British organ of quell in Ireland. It has been observed that Fine Gael Blueshirt noses, are never so happy, as when thrust into the affairs of public amenities, like health care or public water, from which some physiologists, have drawn the inference, that the Blueshirt nose is devoid of any natural human sense of smell, other than the smell of blood, cultivated over many generations, since they were first blooded with cruel intent, and smeared with the fox blood of Anglo Irish hunts, as young children, at the their first traditional Blueshirt, Bluenose, Irish foxhunt.

There's a Blueshirt with a Nose,
And wherever he goes
The people run from him and shout:
"No cotton have we
For our ears if so be
As Enda blows his interminous snout!"

So the lawyers applied
For injunction. "Denied,"
Said the Judge: "the defendant prefixion,
Whate'er it portend,
Appears to transcend
The bounds of this court's jurisdiction."


Below is and article from the Irish Times, concerning a previous Irish Blueshirt Prime Minster, of the same Blueshirt Party as present Prime Minister, Enda Kenny.

Former taoiseach John Bruton criticised for comments about Easter Rising

Ex-Fine Gael leader failed to take account of the context of Rising, commemoration told

Former taoiseach John Bruton: the Kilmichael Ambush Commemoration was told at the weekend that his comments about the Easter Rising and the War of Independence marked the most extreme articulation of a particular view of Irish history. Photograph: Aidan Crawley


Barry Roche



First published:Mon, Dec 1, 2014, 01:00

Former Taoiseach, John Bruton has been accused of failing to recognise the context in which the 1916 Easter Rising took place when he said the rebellion was not justified and Ireland could have achieved freedom through the Home Rule Bill.


Historian and pamphleteer Jack Lane told the annual Kilmichael Ambush Commemoration in west Cork at the weekend that Mr Bruton’s comments about the Easter Rising and the War of Independence marked the most extreme articulation of a particular view of Irish history.


“It is mind-boggling to hear an ex-taoiseach condemn the founding fathers of this state of which he was a leader. Can you imagine a US president denouncing George Washington for their War of Independence or a French president denouncing the French Revolution?


“It is unimaginable and there was a lot more war and bloodshed in establishing these and other states than was the case here where overwhelming popular support for independence minimised the bloodshed,” he told the crowd of about 800 people who gathered at the ambush site.


The annual commemoration marks the victory by Tom Barry and members of the Flying Column of the West Cork Brigade of the IRA over a contingent of Auxilaries from Macroom in the War of Independence


Mr Lane of the Aubane Historical Society said that when Mr Bruton feels the need to claim that Easter 1916 and the War of Independence were misguided and seeks to promote that view, then it is necessary to examine very closely the merits of his arguments.


Mr Bruton had argued that Volunteers of 1916 should have trusted in the Home Rule Bill as it was on the statute and would have evolved into a republic and that there was therefore no need for war and bloodshed, he said.


However this view ignored the fact that the Home Rule Bill was immediately suspended and that volunteers of 1916 had for a period trusted in the Home Rule Bill as evidenced by Padraig Pearse sharing a platform with John Redmond in support of Home Rule in 1912.


However Pearse and others had changed their minds when they witnessed a very real rebellion against the British government’s plan for Home Rule when Tories and unionists “organised themselves to set up an alternative provisional government to prevent Home Rule” in 1912.


An illegal army, the Ulster Volunteer Force, was set up and arms were imported which led to the establishment of the Irish Volunteers “to support the government in implementing Home Rule – to assist in implementing the law not to break it as the UVF were planning to do.”


The British army supported this unionist rebellion with the Curragh Mutiny of 1914 when officers refused to enforce the law on Home Rule and the British government allowed all this to happen and conceded all along the line, he said.


Mr Lane said critics of the Easter Rising say that the organisers had no mandate but the same point could be made about the British government, as it failed to hold an election as it should have done in 1915 and instead did a deal to invite Tories and unionists into government.


“The unionists had their own army, with plenty arms, they had British army support and now they were in government. They had won and it was absolutely clear that Home Rule or any form of Irish independence was off the agenda,” Mr Lane added.


“There was no two ways about it. If that government had its way, we would still be waiting for Home Rule. It was already suspended on the day it was passed on 18th September 1914 and that is where it would remain.”


It is true that those who organised the Easter Rising had no mandate but neither had the British government nor had the unionists for their rebellion other than what they gave themselves. “There were no mandates all around,” he said.


Similarly, Redmond committed the Irish Parliamentary Party to a British war on Germany and Turkey without an electoral mandate as he never put to the Irish electorate that he would take Ireland into an imperial war if the empire gave him Home Rule.


“The Irish Volunteers decided that a rebellion was the only way to get the government to respond to what had been proved by the success of the Unionists and this is the political and moral case for the 1916 rebellion,” he said.


Unfortunately, this narrative had been twisted and was not articulated in either academia, the media or by mainstream politicians, which is why commemorations such as Kilmichael offered a valuable opportunity “to put the record straight about 1916 and the War of Independence”.

FEDERAL IRELAND Irish Times Article

Is it time to revisit the idea of a federal Ireland?

Opinion: If the UK leaves the EU, the North’s status will change, perhaps disastrously

No compromise? The Stormont statue of unionist leader Sir Edward Carson, seen through a broken link, in Belfast. Photograph: Adrian Dennis/AFP/Getty Images

Dennis Kennedy

• News
• Politics

Thu, Nov 13, 2014, 00:01

First published:Thu, Nov 13, 2014, 00:01

While the political parties at Stormont continue their shadow boxing and the world waits with bated breath for the insights of the US envoy to Northern Ireland, Gary Hart, into parades and flags, there seems little chance of what may be the biggest issue facing Northern Ireland even making it on to the agenda.

This is the accident that looks increasingly likely to happen: the UK’s exit from the European Union.

If it happens, the whole context in which the Belfast Agreement was framed, and in which the limited progress since then has been achieved, will be changed radically, and possibly disastrously.

The agreement makes only one mention of the EU (in the preamble, where EU membership is cited as one factor in the unique relationship between the UK and Ireland), but it is the framework of EU citizenship that validates its essential core: the idea that conflicting Irish and British identities can co-exist as equals within present-day Northern Ireland, pending some future resolution of the fundamental divide.

How would the promise in the agreement to “recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose”, and accordingly to confirm their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship, be honoured if the UK, including Northern Ireland, was outside the EU, while the Republic was inside?

How would freedom of movement across the Border be guaranteed when one of the UK’s main motivations for leaving the EU would be to control migration? Would there be a return to a physical Border, with passport checks and queuing lorries? Would fresh restrictions on travel be placed on movement between the Republic and Britain, or even possibly between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK? How would the nationalist community inside Northern Ireland respond to such a situation? Would those now seemingly comfortable enough within the UK remain so? How would the more nationalistic respond to the prospect of Irish unity becoming even more distant, and to the reimposition of a visible controlled Border between North and South? How would Northern Ireland fare within a UK outside the EU?

Scotland would almost certainly demand, and get, a referendum to make its own decision on EU membership, and would most probably opt to stay in the EU, not the UK. That would leave Northern Ireland painfully isolated within a UK that would be even more dominated by the 90 per cent of the population living in England, who are manifestly becoming increasingly nationalistically British or, in reality, English.

Pro-European North

Northern Ireland is not regarded as rampantly pro-European – certainly its politicians are not – but it did vote Yes in the 1975 referendum to endorse membership. Academic research suggests that today the balance among the general public is for, not against, EU membership.

Northern Ireland is too small and too divided to permit the Scottish alternative of independence within the EU, so what options does it have, apart from voting No in any poll on leaving the EU and campaigning in Britain against exit on the grounds of the threat it would pose to a fragile peace?

The answer is very few, so is it time to revisit Conor Cruise O’Brien’s last and most controversial intervention in Northern affairs? In the late 1990s he suggested that the interests of the Protestant or unionist community in Northern Ireland were more threatened by the UK’s determination to do a deal with Sinn Féin/IRA than they would be by a negotiated deal with Dublin to unite Ireland under a federal-type arrangement that guaranteed all existing rights to all residents of the North. This community, he maintained, would be better able to defend its interests under such an agreement than it would as “despised hangers-on” and a tiny minority in the UK.

In a federal Ireland, unionists would be a formidable voting block in a system of government where coalitions are the rule rather than the exception. Conor Cruise O’Brien argued that London would be happy to be rid of Northern Ireland, and would facilitate such a move. Dublin might have more reservations but could hardly say no to the long-cherished goal of Irish unity. At that time, O’Brien also assumed that such a move would trump Sinn Féin, North and South. He did not foresee, it would seem, Sinn Féin’s continued electoral success in the North while playing a leading role in the administration of a devolved region of the UK. Nor, most likely, could he have predicted that party’s reinvention of itself in the Republic as the professed party of protest and social concern, and as the one party untainted by the tarnish that is staining politics generally (despite the much more sinister skeletons in its own cupboard).

Would any significant section of traditional unionism even look at a federal proposal? The once great obstacle of “Rome Rule” has almost vanished, but other roadblocks remain, and the answer is almost certainly no.

But might unionists consider it if life within a very much changed UK was less agreeable to them, and particularly if they felt they were being edged closer and closer to a united Ireland, either by pressure from London or by demographic change in Northern Ireland? This may be venturing into the land of fantasy, but then who foresaw the Chuckle Brothers, starring the immoderate moderator and the republican chief of staff, topping the bill at Stormont?

Everyone has his price, so what sort of price might unionism demand? Obviously a new constitution would be needed to accommodate the new Ireland, and some sort of devolved structure for what is now Northern Ireland.

Some things would have to go: the name of the state could no longer be Éire, nor could Irish be the “first national language”, nor the tricolour the national flag. (Though it’s not in the Constitution, a new national anthem would be needed, and we could throw in neutrality and the names of the railway stations as beyond their sell-by date.)

Constitutional opportunity

Apart from these and other adjustments, the negotiation of a new constitution would be a golden opportunity for the South to get rid of much superfluous material in the current one, and to ensure that matters properly belonging to the parliament are not needlessly put to a patently uninterested people in referendums in which most of them do not vote.
The constitution would have to reflect an ethos for the new entity to which all could subscribe. Writing more than 40 years ago, Michael Sweetman indicated what this might be: “We [in the Republic] have got to go back to 1912 and relinquish a great deal of what has happened since in order that both parts of the country can make a new start.” He deplored “consistent attempts to impose a narrow concept of Irishness, involving the primacy of Gaelic culture, the rejection of British strands in Irish traditions, and a particular view of history which made a virtue of fighting against Britain and a vice of defending British rule”.

And he added: “It is not from that kind of Republicanism, with its glorification of violence in the past and its incitement to violence in the present, that the new Ireland will come.”

That was written, by a then leading young Fine Gael thinker, before the Provisional IRA campaign had, over 30 years of pointless conflict, caused the loss of thousands of lives. What a tragedy that a Fine Gael Taoiseach could still say last month that he was always proud to be a 1916 man and that he saw the Rising as the central formative and defining act in the shaping of modern Ireland.

At this point we can probably stop fantasizing. The Rising was the “formative and defining act” of a partitioned Ireland, in which one part was in many ways Rome-ruled, socially conservative (to put it mildly) and at times dangerously ambivalent towards armed republicanism. This held no attractions whatever for the “divided brethren” in the North. Much has changed in many ways, and in the minds of many of the people, but the State, and its political leaders, cling to their founding fictions.

Waking up at this point would save us from wrestling with the question of where the £9 billion London transfers each year into Northern Ireland would come from. In 1998, Conor Cruise O’Brien blithely assumed that London would be so happy to be shot of Northern Ireland, and Dublin so pleased to welcome it, and the international community so delighted for us all, that they would all stump up. Fat chance of that now. All of which leaves Northern Ireland, as ever, in the quare place.

Dennis Kennedy is a former deputy editor of The IrishTimes, and was European Commission representative in Northern Ireland from 1985 to 1991

@Brian Clarke

Although there is much in the article I disagree with, and the Irish Times has always been a great platform for the Unionist tradition in Ireland, nevertheless it is a good article. As a former chairperson of Provisional Sinn Fein in Newry, who resigned, before.they became decadent, I am presently non -aligned to any political party. However as someone who supports a federal Ireland, as proposed by Ruarai O'Bradaigh of Republican Sinn Fein, I believe this article, would serve as an excellent discussion document, to open negotiations for a peaceful solution, to the primary Irish problems of division, bigotry and prejudice. Unfortunately self-politicians will not act on it, so once again only the ordinary people, from all communities will male it happen. Those who have Ireland's long term interests at heart and learned the lessons of our history, will make it happen with the dialectics of materialism, rather than violence. No it's not fantasy and the EU has a critical role, both materially and politically to take  responsibility as an honest broker, if the US & UK continue to fail to do so.

SAOIRSE Phuk the Begrudgers !

This fucked up version of the song, Kevin Barry, with all Cohen's bollix and despite his ignorance of detail before the song, is still for some unknown reason, my favourite version. Leonard Cohen was one of my favourite singers when I was drinking. He can be as depressive as fuck but then it took me years after I stopped, to realize that alcohol is a depressant. I remember roaring at some friends after I stopped, how the fuck do you enjoy life in Ireland without drinking, and maybe that has something to do with leaving, going to a tropical island, where there is far more sun. When it rains, the heavens open in the monsoon season and it gets it over and done with. None of this pissin around with endless days of soft fuckin rain and dark clouds, that seems to permeate the soul when it drags on.

Well sex is one of the joys of life without drink and I don't do things by half, so it was here we go, phukit.I was no sooner off the plane, than I ordered a business lady. Something I have done thousands of times, since I first stopped drinking. Now before all you born again Irish virgins, start pointing your squeaky, clean, virgin, fingers at me, spare a thought for the poor devil, who's trying to chat up a woman, in the early years of sobriety, having previously always used the lubricant qualities of alcohol all his life in the process. It takes a while, to get the hang of it, especially with the impatient fecker packin in your pants. Anyway she arrived at my bedroom in the airport courtesy of a taxi but the Spirit bless her, she was awful skinny and I thought to myself, that poor woman might have AIDs. So i never got round to the dirty deed, paid her anyway and tried as diplomatically as I could, to make excuses.

Well the game was on, no half measures now as they say, so I got a taxi into the island's most craven arse town this side of the equator that night, and I asked him to drop me off, at the wildest sex bar the town had to offer. Now before I describe things further, you need to give me a bit of poetic licence here, as Irish Blog is already censored for all sorts of political reasons, without giving them the excuse of porn, so I will do the best I can.I might also at this point add, that my best friend is an Englishman down here, who's a bit of a prick sometimes but he's alright.

We made a feature film together, which won the International Australian Film Festival and we've worked on others unscripted and spontaneous since, along the lines of trainspotting, about boiler rooms in various parts of the world. I would also add, that no one in real life, in any of these films, ever had, hand act or part, in anything criminal or participate in anything, whatsoever, remotely related with Irish republicanism. Let that disclaimer be absolutely clear to everybody, because many will try to discredit, but as my favourite drinking toast used to say, fuck the begrudgers. This is a clip from one of them;

Well to get back to the bar, the place was rockin and I mean rockin. People have many concepts of freedom or as they say "one man's meat is another man's poison,' but in my book, freedom is freedom, and naturally, that goes for women too. There was an exotic form of female flesh on stage, playing with herself with all sorts of sexual toys, that this former Catholic altar boy, never saw before, and she was givin it stick, like the hammers of hell. The place was filled with poles and human flesh writhing and clinging on them, in apparent passionate ecstasy. There were tongues being suckin diesel in all sots of orifices, that even I, could never have imagined, up to that point in my life, despite the creative attributes of the alcoholic imagination.

There were also of course, the female hustlers and there was so much decadent flesh on offer, that I just simply couldn't decide on one, so I settled just for a simple sandwich for starters. Now a sandwich for the uninitiated, is a sexual threesome of many different formations, which in this instance, was two exceptionally brazen bitches, not particularly "politically correct" I hear you say, but then the path to wisdom, can often be the way of excess, well that's my excuse anyway. I mean if you're fighting for freedom, it's a good idea, you have it grounded in some form of experience and reality, not just some hazy political concept. That's not just my opinion, that is my experience. 

Well I'm starting to ramble again, so before I bore you today, I'll take a break and come back to this experience, hopefully soon again. But before I do, let me say to all the God fearing christians in Belfast, before they go on about exploiting the women, they were using me, while apart from the good money I spent, they were sitting on top of me later together, both on my face and nether region later on that night, with a bottle in one hand and a spliff in the other, seriously using and abusing my frail body. So up your's Mrs Robinson!

Below is a link to an article, in today's Irish Times, which prompted this article, to try give another side to 'sobriety,' which has been generally een particularly joyous for me. 

10 years of sobriety: what I’ve learned about Irish male emotions

FROM PEACE PROCESS TO IRISH SETTLEMENT PROCESS

Speaking with many people from across the political divide in Ireland currently , the general consensus privately, is that Irish Peace Process, is currently dying a slow death. One of its principal architects Gerry Adams in a statement recently stated, “The political process is in trouble. I believe that the political process faces its greatest challenge since the Good Friday Agreement negotiations in 1998. The anti-Good Friday Agreement axis within unionism; the pro-unionist stance of the British secretary of state Theresa Villiers; the refusal of Downing Street to honour its own obligations, are combining to create the most serious threat to the political institutions in the North in recent years.

“The result of all this is directly undermining power-sharing and partnership government. The unionist leaderships have been encouraged in their posture by a British government that has not been fully engaged with the political process for four years.” He added, that traditional pro-British Unionist were unwilling to participate positively in any of the Agreement's institutions, stating that “Instead it has adopted a tactical approach aimed at serving the political agenda of a fundamentalist rump in their party rather than the needs of the whole community,”

Again yesterday, Adams made a veiled attack, on the current Fine Gael regime in Government in the South of Ireland, which has traditionally protected the Unionists in the North, stating, "An anti-agreement axis has now emerged. There needs to be a pro-agreement axis and the two Governments need to be very, very focused on delivering on the agreement.” 

The Irish Government has been too passive in my view and the Taoiseach(Irish Prime minister) could well emulate the example of Albert Reynolds (Another Peace Process architect who died last week)  to get involved and press ahead but particularly to keep the British Government to its obligations.”

The traditional Unionist Leader in the north Peter Robinson statement in reply, "Once more we see the self-serving attempt by Sinn Fein to distract public attention from real problems by blaming everyone, except itself, for what it asserts is a crisis that impacts on the political institutions."

Last week Hilary Clinton 's aide “Today, too many in Ireland take two decades of a ceasefire for granted. They still focus on their own sense of victimhood of the past and fail to forge a new united community that can not only solidify the peace, but even build shared prosperity. A look back at the hard-fought ceasefire may encourage some broader thinking about the responsibility of leadership to build a better shared future for the people of Ireland.”

The British Conservative Government and their Vice Royal in Ireland, since coming to power, other than enforcing a heavy censorship of international media coverage of the ongoing low intensity war In Occupied Ireland, have irresponsibly taken a hands off approach with the Peace Process and essentially have failed to understand the critical small print of the dying Good Friday agreement.

In a recent statement the leader of Republican Sinn Fein, the traditional  Irish Republican voice, leader Des Dalton stated, "We are being asked to abandon the high ideals, that inspired that revolutionary generation of a century ago and instead embrace the mythology of empire. It is evident that in the decade of centenaries, the political establishments of Leinster House, Stormont and Westminster, are determined to draw a line under Irish history. By demonising and isolating Irish Republicanism and refusing it access to public debate, they hope, that it will simply fade from the public consciousness, robbed of historical or political legitimacy. Quoting from a Ronan Fanning article in the Irish Times, he added,  “…the propagation of a bland, bloodless, bowdlerised and inaccurate hybrid of history, which if carried to extremes, is more likely to provoke political outrage than to command intellectual respect, let alone consensus.”

The Freemasonry of the Orange Order are now front and centre in Unionist, Fine Gael and British politics. Its Chaplain, Rev Mervyn Gibson, the most influential person in all-party talks on flags, parading and the past, is even more influential after the DUP and UUP scuttled the talks by the recent US Government to try move the dying process on, with its envoys Richard Haas and Meghan Sullivan sent packing by the Orange Order, exercising its trump card, the Orange veto.This is one of many critical factors, that was not dealt with by The Peace process. Another was the issue of large numbers of political prisoners still languishing in British Gaols, in both parts of Ireland. This threatens to explode again at any moment, in the same way that, the Hunger Strike of Bobby Sands and the 11 other Irish Republicans, who starved to death on Hunger Strike, changing the face of Irish politics and giving the platform to Adams voice, to be serious player he now is in Irish politics.


Now however, as the Orange Order have demonstrated themselves to be the real voice of traditional Unionism, while  Adams clearly does not speak for traditional Irish Republicans. What Nancy Soderberg and the British Conservative Party in London have failed to grasp, is that the Good Friday Agreement will not stick, without a proper foundation, in the context of both the Orange and Green traditions of Ireland. These traditions are deep in the psyche of the majority of Irish people's consciousness. One of the principal lessons of the last 800 years of irish History which Ms Soderberg in the context of Ireland and many American citizens in the context of their own short history, fail to understand is "Old Europe."


In light of all of this, one does not have to be particularly bright to observe, that the Peace Process is past its sell by date on the ground in Ireland. It clearly needs to evolve into something more comprehensive and inclusive with respect to the matter of Orange/Green traditions and their real voices. Clearly again for a more permanent solution, the "Peace Process needs to evolve from a superficially contrived short term solution into a bedded down Comprehensive Settlement Process


Settlement Process


The English Oxford dictionary  defines "settlement"as "An official agreement intended to resolve a dispute or conflict." Obviously in any permanent settlement, compromise is critical and nobody is going to achieve their ideals.This needs to be first accepted by everyone at the negotiating table, however painful.The alternative is a war for total victory, the consequence of which, no sane mind can countenance. Most fair minded traditional Irish republicans will acknowledge, that the Orange tradition has made considerable sacrifices, with respect to their identity, particularly in the context of both World Wars and the recent ongoing war in Ireland, with tens of thousands losing their lives in all of this.This is a considerable factor in their tradition and identity. Any agreement that ignores this reality is doomed.


Likewise within the "green tradition" millions of Irish have died, as a result of British colonialism. This reality cannot simply be airbrushed out of Irish history by revisionism because it is deeply embedded, consciously or unconsciously, within the Irish psyche, on the same scale as the Jewish Holocaust is with Israelites. It also must be addressed within any credible settlement.There are  many other pressing, critical social issues within Ireland, such as a Bill of Civil Rights, People before Profit, transparent genuine Immediate Democracy, with modern technology, such as the internet democracy, with checks and balances, that ensure ordinary people have real voting power against unregulated Corporate monopolies hijacking the constitutional process with political bribery and the current endemic corruption of the present sytem, in all parts of Ireland


To any objective political view, of the small island of Ireland, with its current political realities, it is crystal clear, that a Federal solution similar to many other European countries, is really the only feasible solution to the current reality with an arrangement where Unionists in Ulster keep their identity and traditions, within a British Commonwealth arrangement, customized specifically to facilitate their specific traditions and arrangements and possibly protect them along with their British brethren form the creeping, fascist monopoly of Europe. This of course will be anathema to many traditional Irish republicans, but it will take compromise, fair mindedness and sacrifice, in any credible settlement, that is based on reality, as opposed to the horrific alternative.

Of course many will argue, that the changing demographics on the ground will change this, but in a Spirit of true reconciliation all minorities, including immigrant aspirations, must be respected in any genuine modern democracy. Traditional Irish Republicans like Ruarai O'Bradaigh, recognized this and presented drafts for a comprehensive agreement that factored in much of this compromise, in a Spirit of Genorosity, which has traditionally been a much acclaimed Irish characteristic, at least until recently. It is time for everyone to get real, put their ego's and personalities to one side and make this comprehensive, inclusive, settlement a reality, based on civilized principles of human progress.

The author formally does not belong to any political organization and offers this proposal in a spirit of unity not division. Because of fascist censorship in Ireland presently, I also ask  those readers who agree with the outlines of this proposal, to share it wherever you can. If you belong to a political party, trade union or political forum or platform, please take up this proposal and make it as inclusive as possible. If you are overseas or non Irish, we still need your help for a comprehensive, inclusive settlement.

by Brian Clarke